Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Daniel VOGEL, appellant, v. Joseph DEUTSCH, et al., defendants, Eliyahu Ladell, respondent.
In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (O'Rourke, J.), dated February 27, 2004, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Eliyahu Ladell which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for medical malpractice alleging, inter alia, that the defendant Dr. Eliyahu Ladell was negligent in the care and treatment of a laceration on his knee. However, Ladell made a prima facie demonstration of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him by proffering evidence that his care and treatment of the plaintiff's knee did not depart from good and accepted medical practice and was not a proximate cause of any of the injuries alleged (see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 487 N.Y.S.2d 316, 476 N.E.2d 642; DiMitri v. Monsouri, 302 A.D.2d 420, 754 N.Y.S.2d 674). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572; DiMitri v. Monsouri, supra; Holbrook v. United Hosp. Med. Ctr., 248 A.D.2d 358, 669 N.Y.S.2d 631). Thus, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of Ladell's motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 14, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)